HomeMy WebLinkAbout00071264CITY OF COLLEGE STATION
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
1101 Texas Avenue South, PO Box 9960
College Station, Texas 77842
Phone (979) 764-3570 / Fax (979) 764-3496
MEMORANDUM
July 17, 2001
TO: John Szabuniewicz, 1004 Shady Drive, College Station, TX, 77840
FROM: Bridgette George, Asst. Development Review Manager
SUBJECT: WESTFIELD ADDITION PH 2 (FP) - FINAL PLAT
Staff reviewed the above-mentioned final plat as requested but had to stop review due to an
incomplete submittal. The following page is a preliminary list of staff review comments
detailing items that need to be addressed. Please address the comments and submit the
following information by Monday, July 23 to be considered for the next Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting scheduled for August 16:
Paid tax certificates from the City of College Station, Brazos County, and CSISD
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at 764-3570.
Attachments: Staff review comments
cc: Westfield Addition Ltd., 7182 Riley Road, Bryan, TX, 77808
Riley Engineering Company, 7182 Riley Road, Bryan, TX, 77808
Case file # 01-157
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM. Sabine Kuenzel, Senior Planner
DATE: Thursday, January 31, 2002
RE: 30/60 area zoning options
I am seeking the Commission's direction regarding the approach to use in analyzing
rezoning cases for the strip of land along the south side of Harvey Road abutting the
Harvey Hillsides neighborhood. The adopted 30/60 plan, which was incorporated into
the City's Comprehensive Plan, suggests that these lots ought to be rezoned to light
commercial or higher density residential uses and to work out unique issues through the
PD process (excerpt attached). This recommendation, however, is not in line with the PD
policy that was later approved by the Commission and Council. The PD policy
essentially would not support site specific issues to be worked out through the PD process
(PD Policy Paper is attached).
I can identify three options:
1. Recommend standard zoning classifications in line with the 30/60
Plan, to be restricted to R-3, R-4, R-5, A-P, C-N, and C-3. Such an
approach would not give the City the flexibility to deal with the unique
aspects of this area, where the lots originally subdivided as residential lots
that are not likely to remain single family and are oriented away from their
abutting neighborhoods. These characteristics could result in typical strip
commercial issues including multiple access points, sign proliferation,
parking conflicts, and negative impacts on the adjoining neighborhood.
i 1ST b E - CD-C5 AL-f-At ~ PLA7(~t ~ . < , %i
2. Change the PD policy to make an exception for the sites located in
areas 7A, 7B, and 7C of the 30/60 study area. The City would thus be
in a better position to encourage property consolidation, limit access drives
and signage, and allow land uses other than those in the limited
commercial or high density residential districts that may be compatible if
properly laid out.
3. Create a special zoning district to deal with the unique issues
affecting these areas. While this is in the long run the best approach, it is
questionable that such an ordinance could be done in a timely manner to
accommodate current development/redevelopment interests.
Attachments:
Excerpt from the Comprehensive Plan involving areas 7A-C of the 30/60 study area
PD Policy Paper
Z-1, FILE COPY
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM. Sabine Kuenzel, Senior Planner `
DATE: Thursday, January 31, 2002
O
RE: 30/60 area zoning options
I am seeking the Commission's direction regarding the approach to use in analyzing
rezoning cases for the strip of land along the south side of Harvey Road abutting the
Harvey Hillsides neighborhood. The adopted 30/60 plan, which was incorporated into
the City's Comprehensive Plan, suggests that these lots ought to be rezoned to light
commercial or higher density residential uses and to work out unique issues through the
PD process (excerpt attached). This recommendation, however, is not in line with the PD
policy that was later approved by the Commission and Council. The PD policy
essentially would not support site specific issues to be worked out through the PD process
(PD Policy Paper is attached).
I can identify three options:
1. Recommend standard zoning classifications in line with the 30/60
Plan, to he restricted to R-3, R-4, R-5, A-P, C-N, and C-3. Such an
approach would not give the City the flexibility to deal with the unique
aspects of this area, where the lots originally subdivided as residential lots
that are not likely to remain single family and are oriented away from their
abutting neighborhoods. These characteristics could result in typical strip
commercial issues including multiple access points, sign proliferation,
parking conflicts, and negative impacts on the adjoining neighborhood.
L
2. Change the PD policy to make an exception for the sites located in
areas 7A, 7B, and 7C of the 30/60 study area. The City would thus be
in a better position to encourage property consolidation, limit access drives
and signage, and allow land uses other than those in the limited
commercial or high density residential districts that may be compatible if
properly laid out.
3. Create a special zoning district to deal with the unique issues
affecting these areas. While this is in the long run the best approach, it is
questionable that such an ordinance could be done in a timely manner to
accommodate current development/redevelopment interests.
Attachments:
Excerpt from the Comprehensive Plan involving areas 7A-C of the 30/60 study area
PD Policy Paper